When the new hydrogen fuel cell plan is looked at closely it actually uses oil that could be set aside. I feel that Bush’s plan for funding fuel cell research will not solve many of today’s problem regarding oil problems in our country because it could be more efficient and have more immediate effects. Although Bush’s plan could someday make a huge difference in the amount of oil used in the US, there is no way of knowing when any changes will be seen. I feel that something needs to be done to change our oil consumption as soon as possible. A major change would be seen very soon if President Clinton’s plan were to continue being funded.
If there is one thing that I have learned in this course it is that our contribution to our environment plays an extremely crucial role in global warming and what our environment will be like in the future for not only the current generation, but for generations to come. To go off my point of picking nuclear power versus coal power, nuclear power has significantly less of an impact on our country than coal. Nuclear power does not contribute carbon dioxide emissions as readily as coal does leaving it far safer for our environment. Another reason that I chose nuclear power over coal power is the idea that nuclear power is extremely reliable and will last longer than fossil fuels. Of course, coal has a significant amount of reserves on hand today, but eventually the world will run out coal and we will be left to find other sources to make our energy from.
Nuclear power should not be dismissed and must be included as a major component of an alternative energy source to replace fossil fuels as it has the greatest potential to be the primary energy source in the future which can work together with other alternative renewable energy sources to combat global warming and to help meet the world’s growing energy demand Nuclear energy, which has historically been depicted as a dangerous and evil energy source, has recently seen renewed attention as an alternative form of energy and has been rehabilitated in the eyes of the public after rising concerns regarding global warming and a rise in the demand of energy (World Nuclear Association 2011). However, due to the March 2011 Fukushima accident, public perception of nuclear safety has been set back. This accident instilled fear and “had a big impact in diminishing the support for nuclear energy” (Wallard, cited in Reaney 2011). This incident reignited the debate over nuclear power in the international community. This essay will consider the arguments from the anti-nuclear energy movement that preceding accidents nuclear prove that nuclear energy always carry risk of a major disaster.
In addition to facilitating the weaning of humans from fossil fuels, renewable energy poses many environmental benefits because renewable means clean. Most scientists will argue that, though the degree to which we benefit might be speculative, human and environmental welfare will increase with tapping of renewable energy sources. If modern science is in any way accurate, using clean and renewable energy would result in better air quality, curbing of climate change and the Greenhouse Effect, and perhaps even the luxury of supplying most or all of our energy domestically. This means that countries like the U.S. would stand heavily resistant to both the ramifications of a global energy crisis and to international political tensions surrounding the trading of oil. Despite its being more expensive, there is much to be gained from renewable energy.
Even though there might be some advantages of nuclear energy, Pakistan being a third world country, should not divert its attention towards nuclear power. Rather Pakistan should focus more on improving its economy to deal its major issues. The government is planning to install many new nuclear plants in order to increase the nuclear power generation capacity. However, the hazards associated with the safety and design of the reactors is being overlooked. It is imprudent of the government that a major nuclear power plant is in close proximity to Pakistan’s largest city, Karachi and if a meltdown or a radiation leak happens it would be very difficult to evacuate the nearby areas.
Only through nuclear energy will the world’s exponential energy demands be met. Despite political hype, environmental consequences, and lack of facility standardization, Nuclear power continues to offer a solution to be a worldwide, emission-free, scalable energy source that can meet global energy demands, as... ... middle of paper ... ... high energy density method, but also while being environmentally healthy as well as sustainable for years to come. In comparison to any other nuclear resource, nuclear energy is the solution that is reliable and powerful. Although interpreted as being affiliated with nuclear warfare, it is in fact, streamlined for an energy model. Hard limits that are put in place by uranium deficiencies and excessive nuclear waste are built on false data.
2009) High status of nuclear energy in developed countries shows that nuclear power could become main electricity supplier. In conclusion, nuclear energy can be a safe way to yield electricity. Modern reactors and international safety measures can avoid most of perils of nuclear energy. Nuclear industry is developing and improving safety and security measures, which regulate proliferation, waste disposal and ageing of nuclear power plants. Moreover environmental and economic benefits demonstrate nuclear power being preferable substitute for fossil fuel resources.
There are more efficient energy sources other than nuclear power and we must do our part today to prevent a catastrophic future for our children. The dangers that nuclear power plants pose for the United States are very real. There are many alternative renewable sources of energy available to us such as wind and solar power, which provide a much safer and efficient alternative to nuclear power. You alone have the power to speak up and act against the expansion of this dangerous energy. The future of our environment’s safety and our nation’s energy supply lies in your hands.
The breakthrough occurred in 1970’s and nuclear energy was found to be a plausible source of power. But during the past two decades it has become a ponderous discussion whether the use of nuclear energy is safe or not. It has always been a matter of great controversy whether we would ever be able to get rid of the nuclear waste that is the byproduct of the use of nuclear energy that is imperative in our advancement in science. But the truth is that without its use, the energy required to power the worldwide populace would fall far short. So, it is a necessity that we use it, but the methods for safe disposal should also be explicit.
Nowadays it has become apparent that the current use of fossil fuels to power the nation has had a massive impact on our environment. In recent years, the governments have had to try to take some sort of action to combat the problem of global warming and the emission of greenhouse gasses. Particularly the use of taxes and encouraging local industries to reduce their emissions by the use of grants to help implement greener systems. For the future it seems in the United Kingdom, we have two main options for the production of power other than fossil fuels. We can look towards more nuclear power plants, whilst not exactly ‘green’ they produce no carbon emissions and massive amounts of power per year for the needs of the county.